Fill Hartford's Parking Craters With Buildings

Plans are in motion to redevelop the massive parking lots behind the state office building at 165 Capitol Ave., just a block from Bushnell Park in Hartford.

Plans are in motion to redevelop the massive parking lots behind the state office building at 165 Capitol Ave., just a block from Bushnell Park in Hartford.

(Cloe Poisson / Hartford Courant)

Hartford's property tax structure makes little sense. By assessing vacant lots and surface parking lots at a much lower rate than commercial buildings, the city has encouraged the proliferation of what urban designers call "parking craters" — blank blots on the cityscape.

But Hartford City Councilman John Gale has revived a potential remedy that is certainly worth considering, as long as it is done carefully.

Tax The Lots More

Mr. Gale suggests essentially turning the tax upside down by increasing the tax rate on undeveloped land in the area around the magnificent Bushnell Park, thereby eliminating the financial incentive to tear down buildings.

The city's current tax rate is about 75 mills, or $75 for each $1,000 worth of assessed property. That applies to everything. But buildings are taxed more than land because they are assessed at a rate generally four times higher.

If the tax rate on undeveloped land were increased to 198 mills, as in one of Mr. Gale's examples, the annual tax bill on the parking lot at the site of the former Parkview Hilton would increase from $170,000 to $450,000.

His proposal adds an incentive to build by taxing new commercial structures on those sites at only 39 mills, what Mr. Gale described as a tax abatement.

The trick is avoiding the pitfalls that surface lot owners have pointed out: Taxing the land at too high a rate could increase parking fees or may prompt some owners to develop their lots in a way that would produce income for them but give city planners nightmares. Some owners might even abandon the lots.

Stop The Tear-Downs

Owners of lots near the park are opposed to Mr. Gale's plan, saying that government subsidies to build are a necessary first step to spurring development.

But Mr. Gale's plan would clearly discourage building owners from demolishing their higher-taxed buildings and putting in lower-taxed parking lots instead — a fate that has befallen many venerable structures in the city, including historic buildings near Union Station and more.

The effect on the city's finances could be profound. A study by a team of University of Connecticut scholars calculated that the city gives up a lot of tax money with parking lots. The researchers estimated that Hartford forfeits $1,200 per year per parking space. "This amounts to a subsidy of more than $50 million per year for all the parking in downtown Hartford," said UConn engineering Professor Norman Garrick.

He and another researcher also found that since 1960, the number of parking spaces in downtown Hartford has grown by 300 percent — in part so that state government can provide its employees with parking: "The state ties up some of what is potentially the most valuable land in the city."

Other cities, including Cambridge, Mass., Portland, Ore., and Washington, D.C., have successfully limited parking and converted lots into "productive use" with good results.

Over the decades, Hartford's parking lot craters have contributed to one of the city's most significant problems: a paucity of valuable taxable property. Providing incentives to develop buildings instead of parking lots will help attract businesses and downtown dwellers and draw more tax revenue.

Former Mayor Eddie Perez advocated for such a "split tax" in the 2000s. In 2013, the state legislature allowed some municipalities to target vacant parcels with specialized tax districts.